Is there an upgrade path for Lynnfield? From what I gather there doesn't seem to be one, and only a 6 core for Bloomfield. What then, 1156/1366 are dead? Looking likely I reckon. Can't see Sandy Bridge dropping into any of todays boards. If this is correct Lynnfield is a sad joke and Westmere is not much better, just an intro into 32nm. Who's going to want Gulftown when SB is around the corner? Those wanting to get the last use of their X58 I guess. Reply

I don't think TA152H is your average user and all this flak he's causing is because his advice should not be aimed at the typical Anandtech audience. He's right that Bloomfield is better than Lynnfield but he isn't thinking from the point of view of say, a typical PC gamer that visits this site to figure out what to build for his next system. The gamer cares less about whether a cpu can fold proteins faster with 8 threads, and more about whether it can play current games fast, and keep up with upcoming games for DX11. And most importantly they want to pay as little as possible. These are the gamers that will never use SLI or some elaborate 24" multi-monitor setup. They are looking to spend $400-500 on CPU/mobo/ram and $250-300 for a video card.

These folks should not be directed to buy a Bloomfield or have anything to do with the 1366 platform. It's fast but it's too expensive in terms of any real-world benefit in framerate. Yes it may have some longevity since Gulftown will use the same socket, but none of these guys will ever shell out $1000 for a CPU upgrade so it's a dead-end platform for them already.

Instead, TA152H is advocating that Clarkdale will be better than Lynnfield because of the IGP. It might be good for non-gaming, casual PC users, but the typical gamer is going to get a discrete video card anyways and will not really care for an IGP-CPU at all, especially if the on-board graphics will hamper overclocking. 32nm versions of Lynnfield aren't coming out till mid-2010. All that is left now is just Lynnfield i5/i7. Ideally the best option right now would be to get the i5 750, a cheap non-SLI mobo, then overclock it to 3.3-3.5 gHz. It doesn't have hyperthreading like the 860 but you won't see many games that will need 4+ cores/threads for the next couple years anyways.

The goal is to build an inexpensive system now to hold them over till late 2011 when Sandy Bridge is out and new motherboards will have SATA 6GB, USB 3.0, and PCIe 3.0. By then we should see more games that will effectively utilize 4+ cores as well. So why spend more for something that won't be measureably better for games, especially when you'll probably upgrade around the same time anyways? For this segment Lynnfield > Bloomfield in terms of performance/value. Reply

That's always how it's been with computers. You can look at it as a negative, but, then, that would be kind of the wrong way.

Look at it this way, if it were at the point that you were completely comfortable with buying something now, that wouldn't be obsolete, then that would tell a sad story about the future, wouldn't it?

Lynnfield is a sad joke, no argument there. But, what comes after it, based on the technology, should be good. It's going to be all a lot of people need, with low power use, and low cost. Most people don't upgrade processors, and just replace whole computers. Do you really change processors that often, without replacing motherboards? I do sometimes, but most often, by the time the processor is old, the motherboard should be replaced too.

If you really like socket longevity, AMD normally does a better job at that. Strangely, with just about everything platform related, they seem to do a great job now that they have ATI. Whoever said they made a mistake buying ATI was a fool. They make great chipsets, and great GPUs. They are the only thing keeping AMD relevant these days. Reply

Well, the same argument could have been made for Penryn, who would want that when Nehalem was just around the corner. I wouldn't be too surprised if the sockets stay the same, but it will be up to the motherboard maker to provide a BIOS update, which few if any will. Reply

I need something new to replace my iPhone 3G[S]. Apple's blocking of Jailbreaks and control over application development is upsetting me.

Please get into the smartphone soon, allow users to install a Linux, Google, or Windows distro. And as you do, please integrate a more powerful GPS, afterall, that's what makes these mobile devices amazing. W/o it, it'd just be another palm pilot/pda. Reply

Even in Otellini's throne Pat has always been CEO in my mind. I dont know why got it mixed up. He has always been an Intel Spoke person. And has some sort of Steve Job Charisma. I honestly hope Pat will be back to Intel CEO someday. Andy Grove was the only Intel CEO that i really admire, and Pat being his sort of apprentice was another guy i admire as well.

Between your "Intel will never be the same with out Pat" comment and Anand's stirring remarks (eulogy?), it sounds like the man died! Ok, in all seriousness now, I understand paying respect where it is due to the man and his work. Maybe now that he's an outsider, so to speak, you could convince him to do guest articles from time to time. Reply

Not really. The Atom has a horrible chipset out now, and has been out too long for this to be acceptable. The Lynnfield is a solution looking for a problem. It's not the real deal, and it's too expensive to sell low cost, and more than this, they don't have an IGP for it.

They put out two half-baked products, that could be successful were they hitting all on cylinders, but probably will wait until they combine them with another chipset, or combine it with internal video before they really reach their potential in their markets.

Intel is really weird. They have a lot of good, but they seem to skip the important details to fill out their products. It's kind of the opposite of before.

I think AMD's announcement is much more important. The i860 and i870 are essentially nothings - they don't really address a market very differently than before. The i5 750 is an important product, as it moves a lot of processing power into an important cost segment, but then, there's no IGP for it. If they had an IGP for the Lynnfield, I think it could really take off, especially with the i5 750. Instead, the sales are disappointing. I said this before they admitted it, so why couldn't they see this also? Anyone could, if I could.

AMD should do very nicely with the new $99 quad core Athlon. The i5 750 is better, no question, but does it come with IGP? Nope. Does it cost as little? Nope. Is it easy to communicate to average people that this processor is really better? Nope.

Score one for AMD, price and platform should win over a superior processor. Although, the Intel name carries a lot of weight.

Until they have an IGP, Intel needs to lower their prices of the Lynnfield if they want to sell them in numbers. Until then, AMD and Core 2 should still take the Lion's share. Well, until they get an IGP. Then the low end Lynnfields should be really attractive. Reply

This guy looks like he is secretly paid by AMD. For non gaming tasks G45 is more than good. But of course you won't want this to come out, would you? Then again to some ppl gaming is everything.
See this review of G45 on MissingRemote.com a HTPC focused website:

“Picture quality was tested against an ATI 4650 (Catalyst 9.4) by watching a ten minute sequence from a BD disc, switching inputs on the AVR to watch the same sequence on the other card using the same software player, then repeating with another sequence from another disc. The quality was noticeably better on the G45, especially in darker scenes where some of the finer detail was lost on the ATI card. “

Does the Lynnfield have the G45? That's my point, bonehead. I'm not saying the Core 2 makes no sense (although, many don't at the price they are at), but the Lynnfield because it has NO IGP. Get it now.

For what it's worth, I prefer, as a company, Intel to AMD. Mainly because Intel is American, and I don't know what AMD is anymore. I loved Jerry Sanders, but I hate Hector Ruiz.

Also, Intel invented the microprocessor, and at least tried to kill x86. So, I do like Intel, but that's really got nothing to do with anything. That's probably why you think I prefer AMD. I don't let personal opinions like that influence my opinions on products.

I just think AMD did a better job with their marketing of the quad-core Athlon. Also, I'm frustrated because I want to buy a nettop, but Intel still doesn't have a suitable chipset. Haven't they had enough time? Reply

Actually Intels next-gen on-package GPU will be based of G45. You don't like AMD anymore because their manufacturing arm is based in Germany and owned by the American ally UAE/Abu Dhabi? Seems retarded as they're putting in billions to build a fab in New York. It's not like all Intel fabs is in the US. Just buy a S775 Mini-ITX with nVidia 9300 and a suitable C2D-based cpu for now if you like some small nettop like computer with more performance, there's also some other ION based stuff on the market if you like an OEM-computer. (Like
EeeBox PC EB1012) Reply

I was really looking forward to info on Pineview, but it looks like there's nothing. I've been holding out for months on buying a netbook, waiting for more info on Pineview to surface (it's effect on battery life mainly). Reply

I'd have to agree.
Intel are pushing the boundaries, kind of, in the higher end, but the new chips (especially the i5) don't offer a huge leap over existing quad core products, unless you consider things like overclocking.
There seems to be little real development in terms of Larrabee.

AMD may not be pushing the high end, but they have quad cores for $100, they are about to unveil their new graphics architecture, they have a solid desktop platform.

AMDs main stumbling block IMO at the moment is in the mobile space. With improved CPUs they could have a brilliant platform offer, but CPU power consumption isn't ideal at the moment, which is a shame, but AMD still haven't caught up while Intel are doing nothing in the mobile arena.

Intel have lots of positive products, but it just feels like they are somewhat lacking. They are fast, they get faster, but there's no real game changing element to introducing a new higher priced offering all the time.
I'm quite happy with my sub $100 quad core chips, my triple monitors from one consumer level graphics card, and if they get round to it, a nice laptop platform.

If it wasn't for overclocking, I'd probably be using AMD in my desktop (yay for E5200 @ 3.4GHz on cheap mobo+ram), and the main issue I have with my laptop is poor battery life, but then it was a fair bit cheaper than comparable Intel laptops, so those are the sacrifices. Reply

Actually, they do realize how important the IGP in the market is, but they are not going to include that with the Lynnfield quad cores. I mean, they are supposed to be high end. It's a little disappointing that quad core users won't get an IGP option, but how many did before anyway? Reply

High end machines are not always machines that need video. I use my high end machine for compiling. How much video power do I need. A place I worked at used high end machines for computation fluid dynamics? How much video did they need? Zero.

There are a lot of instances where you have high computational needs, but not high graphical needs. And, many of these, you don't have the desire to use up a slot, and use extra power for a discrete card. Or the cost, if you buy 1000s of them, like many companies do.

Most quad cores DID have the option. The only ones that didn't were the Bloomfield. The Core 2 does. All the AMD chips can be had on a platform with an IGP. Bloomfield is a high end product, and I can almost understand Intel for not putting an IGP there, but like I said, there are uses. It's also harder to do with an IMC, since you can't use the memory controller on the NB anymore. But, anyway, for the Lynnfield, which is a brain-damaged, stripped down version of the Bloomfield, you're now moving into a lower price segment. In this price segment, you're really going to see a lot more interest in the IGP. The i5 750 almost screams for it.

There just seems to be a disconnect between Intel's different parts. They seem to be doing well with the processors, but the platforms seem to be lagging a bit. As we all know, you can't sell the processor without the platform, so I think Intel is hurting themselves.

If I had to recommend a home machine, and I do fairly often, I would either recommend a dual core Core 2, or Athlon. The Athlon has such an attractive platform, it can really be as important, or more, than the processor itself. Most processors are fast enough for people, but, most people always like to save money, and the G45 isn't really powerful enough. To put it another way, there are more times a G45 will hold you back, than a $100 quad core Athlon. Reply

The lack of an IGP in lynnfield is a consequence of their moving it to the CPU and wanting to keep lynnfield's price down. They could have put a GPU in it, but it would have added die size, complexity, and heat. Would you rather all lynnfields be $30 more expensive, or would you you keep the $30 savings and use a $30 cheapy PCI-E GPU when its needed and put the $30 towards a gaming GPU when your client needs that?

Worry not, as soon as sandy launches quads will have iGPU options as well again. And with sandy it'll be one die, moving the GPU there for the first time and the IMC gets to move back to the CPU die. Reply

You realize you can put an IGP in the chipset, right? They could have done that, or, waited until 32nm to release this type of chip. It's not too far away, and it wouldn't create the market confusion the Lynnfield has.

More to the point, the Lynnfield is overpriced. Well, the P55 is. Why does it cost so much? There's almost nothing to do it. Why does it cost as much as the P45? No memory controller, no PCIe, but it costs the same. The platform doesn't make a lot of sense at the price it's at.

Intel made a Celeron platform, which is all the Lynnfield is, except it's even more compromised, but it hasn't settled into its proper spot. It costs too much, it doesn't have the IGP, and it doesn't make any sense right now. When they move the Celeron (which I'll call the Lynnfield and succeeding platforms) down in price, get rid of the Core 2, and give it an IGP, it will be like the old 300 MHz Celeron A. It will be REALLY attractive for a lot of people, and you'll have real market separation between it and the real i7, particularly with the six core processors.

Right now, it's just a mess. The market segmentation is just wrong, and that's why these things aren't selling. They're a good idea, and long term should do great when everything is ready, but as is, it's just not a Bloomfield, and tries to act like it is. Reply

IGP is not that important on the Desktop, and G45 is "ok" to get a lot of tasks done, although not as good as the 9200/9300/9400 NV or 790Gx from AMD. Get a discrete card if you need one, and there are always low-profile options. Most people (non HTP aside) that use IGP are business users, and they could care less about IGP.

Lynnfield >>>>>>>>>>> Athlon X4. End of story.

AMD's quads do not come with a IGP either, so you seem very confused between what a CPU and a IGP is. Neither AMD nor Intel has these bundled (yet). Reply

Um, I think he means that there is no IGP option available for Socket 1366 or 1156, as in, the P55 and X58 chipsets don't offer any graphics support, so you MUST buy a graphics card.
For AMD, you can get a 780/785/790 based motherboard, or something from NV, and get your graphics from the motherboard. That's IGP. It's not on-die IGP, but it's on the motherboard, so you don't need a separate graphics card for your display.

IGP as in G45 vs HD3200 might not be that important, but IGP vs no IGP? That's a bit different. Reply